This is the Winner essay of our 2010 writing contest conducted in cooperation with Everest Productions. Participants were asked to write down to live out what truly mattered to them most assuming they were told they had only three days left in this life.

Time-our most precious commodity-may seem infinite, but it is also unrecoverable. Once a moment is spent, it is gone forever. This is because we are linear beings. We are born into this world at Point A-our Arrival-and then move forward from there, making some detours along the way. We wander-sometimes aimlessly-to Point B, taking a spouse, perhaps, or throwing ourselves into our careers. Later, we meander to Point C, which is trying to enjoy our lives on the way to old age. But ultimately we all arrive at the same destination, which is Point D-our Death. There are no exceptions to this rule, and it is not an arguable point. We cannot sue God to recoup the losses of our misspent youth, and the universe has one iron-clad policy regarding time: YOU WASTE IT, YOU’VE LOST IT. So, with this information firmly in mind, I ask myself: “What would I do if I had only 72 hours left to live?” It is an interesting question that is difficult to answer because I have spent the majority of my adult life in prison. Which, incidentally, is where I am now.

I am currently serving a 6-year sentence and have no way of knowing if I will ever see the streets again. I am forty-five years old and healthy, but as we all know-tomorrow is promised to no one. So this question of 72 hours intrigues me on several levels, the first of which is: “What would it be like to die alone in prison?” I rarely speak with my family, and while I do have a couple of good friends, they are not here. So here I would die, and alone it would be. The implications of that statement have shaken me in a way that until a few days ago I would have thought impossible. I can barely imagine lying here on my prison bunk, knowing that soon I would close my eyes, never to open them again. I have accomplished nothing of importance in my life, and with 72 hours to live there would be virtually no chance of me doing anything to benefit this world or anyone in it. Sure, I have written five novels, but much like me, they are lying dormant doing nothing to benefit anyone. The thought that they would never be published makes me want to cry. In fact, I can feel that thought wrenching my heart as I write this very sentence. Nevertheless, all of that is a very selfish way of thinking, but it is with that self-centered attitude that I am most comfortable. Due to my addiction and abuse of alcohol, I have led a very selfish life. I rarely gave more than a passing thought to the feelings or well-being of others. Now, however, I will admit this: I feel quite remorseful of the way I have treated others. I am not a heartless person; I just had to close my heart to combat the pain of addiction, and then the emptiness of long-term incarceration. I wasn’t always like that, of course. I was even in love once-a long, long time ago. I remember it like it was yesterday, but that is only because nothing of importance has happened to me since. It’s funny now, more than twenty years later, but I can still remember the way she kissed. I still miss her sometimes. If I had only 72 yours left to live, I would probably think a lot about her. It was the last time that I was truly happy.

But happy memories are self-indulgent, and with my life-clock ticking down, I believe that the time would have finally arrived for me to make peace with myself. I have never forgiven myself for wasting the talents and gifts that God has given me. I am not a stupid man: I know for a fact that I could have helped others. I could have made a difference. I could have shown people how to avoid walking down the same lonely roads that I have traveled. I could have shown them how important it is to be able to smile at yourself in the mirror, and how empowering it is to thank God every day for all that has occurred-good or bad. But I didn’t. Instead, I spent my life at the bottom of a vodka bottle, doing nothing but feeling sorry for myself. What a waste. What a complete and shameful waste.

So here, now, lying on a prison bunk contemplating the prospect of having 72 hours to live, sadly, I suppose, that for me it would all come down to regrets. The biggest of these would be that I never had children. Not because I don’t like them-because I do-but because I grew up without a father, and I could never bring myself to inflict that kind of pain on my own child. And since I was unable to stop drinking, it was a certainty that I would always be in prison. Nevertheless, I have to say that just once in my life it would have been nice to get a big goodnight hug along with an, “I love you, Daddy.”

But in the end I suppose that I would use my last few hours searching for the meaning of life. Not in some universal sense, but in a very personal-and, as usual-selfish way. I would like to say that I would put aside my life-long obsession with gratifying my own immediate desires, but the truth is – I have no idea how to do that. Selfless acts seem a mystery to me, yet I don’t know why. Even in the past when I’ve done the smallest of kindnesses, such as giving spare change to a homeless person, I am sure that somewhere in the back of my mind I was thinking, “Did you see that God? When you get a chance, could you jot that down on my scorecard?”

And-yes-I do believe in God. So in those last few hours I would be constantly calling Him on His cell phone, asking Him to forgive me for my past indiscretions. He would forgive me, being the loving and merciful God that He is, and maybe that is what my entire existence here on earth would boil down to those last few moments in which I realize that I have done nothing to be worthy of God’s mercy and grace, but will receive it anyway.

So again-here, now-lying on this prison bunk, it’s difficult to find any one thing that I could do to make a difference. I am open to any revelations or epiphanies that God might like to place on my heart because after having caused so much pain on my brief journey through this world, I would dearly love to “shuffle off this mortal coil,” believing that I have left this place a little better than how I found it.

It’s a lovely thought.

It is an interesting question.

Which is why I find it so disturbing that in an infinite universe full of limitless possibilities, I am still unable to offer a satisfactory answer.

There is explicit information in the divine scriptures that the Great Flood did take place, and that it was a divine message to humanity. About these two points, most of the members of the three Abrahamic religions, and even members of many other faiths, do not have a problem at all. But if we want to draw detailed information about the flood, then we see many topics of discussion: was it a local or global flood? What were the number and kinds of animals in the ark? What was the size of the ark? What was the date of the event? And so on.

In the Qur’an, we are not given all of the details of the flood event. In fact, we should not expect to find all of the details in the revelation, because its primary goal is to inculcate love and respect of God in people, not to teach them science or history. So, from a religious perspective, details such as whether the flood was local or global, whether the ark was powered or not, etc., are irrelevant. What matters is that human beings are not left to their own in this life, and that they have a responsibility towards their Creator. What is more, if dealing with such undisclosed details is diverting us from the main point, this means we are being blinded by what we think we know; not illuminated. Maybe, this is why we are not given in the Qur’an those details. So, one needs to be careful in this regard.

However, keeping the mentioned warnings in mind, for a person eager to discover other signs of God that are invisible at first glance, the doors of study are wide open. Accordingly, when scholars set out to make a complete picture of the Great Flood based on the information from the revelation, at times they rationally fill in the missing details, or interpret already existing ones. And this is exactly where the discussions start.

In this article, it is our intention to make a brief analysis of the Islamic sources on this issue. In doing this, Qur’anic verses [1] and the exegesis of these verses by three prominent Muslim scholars from the classical and modern era (Hamdi Yazir, Fahr al-Din al-Razi, and Ibn Kathir) are going to be our main references. Then, with the knowledge and comprehension of a contemporary mind, the suggestions of these scholars are going to be scrutinized, again based on the information from the Qur’an [2]. Our aim is to show that there is still room for discovery in the story of the Great Flood, that there probably are other signs of God not revealed so far.

Before we begin, we also would like to underline what is not our intention. Just as in the case of a miraculous feeding of hundreds of people from a bowl of food, it is nonsense to discuss what quantum mechanical processes might have led to such a result, it is similarly futile to try to entirely explain the Great Flood in a cause-effect chain. If something is a miracle, it means that God performs it out of the confines of His practice [3] (what we call as “God’s customs” are referred to as “cause-effect chain” by some scientists). But if it is not a miracle, such as the presence of the little amount of food initially in the miracle of abundance, then it can be scrutinized in terms of God’s customs. Therefore, while discussing the Great Flood, we need to keep in mind this criterion to distinguish between its miraculous and customary parts.

Another point that is not intended is to shake the reliability of scholars in religious matters. Those scholars had not only the best and sincerest of intentions to understand the revelation, but also the fear of God lest they misrepresent the content of the revelation. So, the discussion in this article should not invalidate the reliability of the scholars in essential matters of faith, since our discussion is focused on secondary issues rather than primary ones.

Having outlined what is intended and what is not, let’s start.

Persisting questions

Based on different combinations of interpretations of the existing information from the Qur’an, you could derive several variances of the Great Flood. In this article, we are going to briefly question the prevailing flood scenario suggested by scholars.

Was it a local or a global flood?

There is still debate about whether the flood was local or global. Let’s analyze the two cases, starting with the global scenario. When we say global, it is not necessarily a flood that is covering the entire surface of the earth, but rather the majority of it, and also it affected the entirety of humanity. Conversely, a local flood is one that affects a minor part of the earth and only a part of humanity. In this regard, the prayer of the Prophet Noah calling for the destruction of the unbelievers is taken by some scholars as a sign for a global flood.

Noah also said: “My Lord! Do not leave on the earth any from among the unbelievers dwelling therein.” (Noah 71:26)

One can say that his prayer does not necessarily point to its fulfillment, and this is a fair objection. But, when Noah prayed for the salvation of his unbelieving son, a relatively minor issue, he was corrected at once, and we are informed about it in the Qur’an:

Noah called out to his Lord, saying: “O my Lord, my son was of my family, and Your promise is surely true, and You are the Most Just of Judges.” (God) said: “O Noah he is not of your family. He is one of unrighteous conduct. So do not ask of Me what you have no knowledge of. I admonish you so that you do not behave as one among the ignorant.” (Noah) said: “O my Lord! I seek refuge in You, lest I should ask of You what I have no knowledge of. And unless You forgive me and have mercy on me, I will indeed be among the losers.” (Hud 11:45–47)

One would think that if God is telling us a correction to a minor issue, He would certainly let us know about a correction to a major issue. The fact that such a correction is missing can be understood as the fulfillment of the prayer. So, in this regard, the Qur’an contains information that can lead to a global flood scenario [4].

If we consider the local flood scenario, first of all, we see that it, too, has support from revelation. According to a verse in the Qur’an, Noah was not a global prophet, but was only sent to his people (Noah 71:1). If the flood came due to his situation among his people, only those who are in his community should be affected. Thus, it was a local flood.

Another detail supporting the local flood idea is the way Noah was consoled by God before they went out of the ark after the flood.

He was told: “O Noah! Get you down in peace and safety from Us, and with blessings upon you and upon the communities who are with you. Communities – We will provide for them to enjoy themselves for a term and then there will visit them from Us a painful punishment.” (Hud 11:48)

Looking at this verse, Razi concludes that Noah was worried about how they are going to survive after all that happened. And so, God consoled Noah telling him to go out in peace and abundance. Such peace and abundance would not be possible in a place that was totally devastated by the flood. Aside from this, the same verse has a reference that can be interpreted as the sign of other communities on the earth after the flood. These clues altogether support a local flood scenario.

How about the animals in the ark?

Information from the Qur’an about the gathering of the animals is as follows:

Until the time when Our command came and the boiler started boiling over, We said: “Embark in it a pair of each kind, and your family, except those against whom Our sentence has already been passed, and those who believe.” And those who believed with him were few. Noah said, “Board it! In God’s Name be its course and its mooring. Surely my Lord is All-Forgiving, All-Compassionate.” (Hud 11:40-41)

There are several questions, however, about the involvement of the animals in this story. These questions are mainly due to the assumption that there were thousands of animals on board.

If we assume that there were thousands of species on board, the first question is “how did thousands of species get together?” Is it just an obvious miracle that Noah calls the animals, and suddenly all of the animals start rushing to the ark? If we assume that they were somehow collected, how is it possible that animals which live in totally opposite climate conditions could survive in the ship? What kind of an ark can contain hundreds of thousands of different animals on board? How about their food, was the ark big enough to contain sufficient food to feed thousands of animals for a long time? Considering the small number of believers on the ark, how were the animals cared for? Were the animals free to wander around in the ark? How come they did not create terror in there or devastate it? How were hygiene conditions met while all those creatures coexisted in the same place with humans?

Contrary to the number of questions listed above, there is no information in the Qur’an about the state of the travelers while on board. Can the absence of such information point to something else that we are missing, for example another miraculous event while in the ark that can answer our questions?

Was the ark a sail-type or was it powered?

Some contemporary Islamic scholars claim that it was powered by a kind of steam engine. This conclusion is arrived through the Qur’anic phrase “farat-tannur” (Hud 11:40–41), which means “a boiler that is boiling over.” But this conclusion of the Muslim scholars also entails several questions.

A ship does not need an engine if it is only meant to float. As long as it has hydrodynamic stability and structural strength, it can do the job. Let’s say the engine is needed to maneuver the ship according to a predetermined route. However, there is no clue in the divine descriptions for the presence of such a route. Furthermore, one verse in the Qur’an clearly reports that the route of the ark is up to God (Hud 11, 41). Then, why is the engine needed in the first place, even if it did really exist?

As a result, we are left with this mind-intriguing phrase “farat-tannur,” which needs a meaningful explanation. Whether Noah’s ark was powered or not is still uncertain.

What is the clear sign for all worlds?

In the Qur’an, we are told that “it is a sign for all worlds – ayatan lil alemin” (Ankabut 29:14–15) [5]. Scholars tell us that the pronoun it could either refer to the ark or to the flood. However, the things that are attributed to a “sign” in the Qur’an are obvious things. If we assume that the clear sign for all is the ark, then it must be available to us for it to become a sign. So, it is unlikely that the sign mentioned in the verse is the ark.

On the other hand, the pronoun it could refer to the flood story as the clear sign for all, which is currently more plausible than the ark being the sign. But, there are several other destruction stories in the Qur’an which could potentially be a clear sign for all. What makes Noah’s story so special aside from the others so that only it is mentioned as “a sign for all,” and a separate chapter in the Qur’an is reserved for it? This question becomes even more pronounced if the flood was only a local one. How come a local flood involving limited number of people is so distinct from the other destruction stories, and can become a clear sign for all until the end of time?

What is the water of the sky, and where is it coming from?

The start of the flood-related events is explained in the Qur’an as follows:

So We opened the gates of the sky, with water outpouring; and We caused the earth to gush forth with springs, so the waters combined for a matter already ordained. (Qamar 54:11–12).

There are several curiosity-arousing points in this explanation, some of which are mentioned below.

The distinctive explanations for the two waters given in the verse bring the question whether this rain water could be an unusual one [6, 7]. Curious enough, the literal translation of the quoted verse says “the water met,” not “waters combined.” Some scholars say that such singular mentioning is due to the fact that water is a single entity whether its origin is a spring or rain. However, if we consider the water of the sky as something other than regular water, then the verse becomes literally explicit, because it is actually only the water of the earth that is meeting something from the sky. According to the rules of interpreting the Qur’an, such literally explicit and rational meaning is preferable over an interpreted one.

Second, the gates of the sky are told to be opened by the coming of the water, not “the water is let go by the gates.” Along the same lines, in the Qur’an, the explanation of the events of the end of times involves an opening of the sky. Could gates of the sky have anything to do with events other than just rain?

An interim solution

A scenario suggested by Islamic scholars that can resolve several of the questions stated so far assumes that the humanity at the time of Noah was not much populated, and was a single tribe [8]. Thus, a local flood that threatens the small human population does not necessitate the gathering of all of the animals on the earth. Instead, only animals sufficient to sustain the life in the immediate aftermath of the flood are gathered in the ark. The people around Noah would step on land and make their living from these animals, and as time goes by, the rest of the animals elsewhere on the earth would re-populate the once-flooded regions.

However, this local flood story brings with it some problems. If it was a local flood, and if the ark was only large enough to contain a few believers and a few animals, where is the greatness of the Great Flood, where is the clear sign for all worlds? What is the big deal with the water of the sky and earth, if it suffices to have a local flood, which can even be achieved with regular rains? Why did God explicitly give the instructions for the construction of the ark to Noah, if it is a local flood that people could survive by a regular ark?

Conclusion

The discussion presented in this article shows the gist of the debates surrounding the idea of the Great Flood. Yet, despite hundreds of years of study, there is no satisfactory scenario that can answer all these, and possible other, questions. In any case, what we know for sure is that whether it is a global flood or a global warming, we should not wait for clear signs to appear in order for us to obey the Lord of the worlds; because when they appear, it may be too late.

Sermed Ogretim has a PhD in Aerospace Engineering and is currently working as a postdoctoral fellow at West Virginia University. He has a special interest in psychological fiction.

Notes

1 The translations of the Qur’anic verses are taken from Ali Unal’s The Qur’an with Annotated Interpretation in Modern English, The Light Inc., NJ, USA, 2006.

2 For certain points in the discussion, we are going to provide supplementary information from the Old Testament that is in agreement with the Qur’an.

3 Erdin, M., “Are Religion and Science Compatible,” The Fountain, Issue 49, Jan.-Mar. 2005.

4 According to the Old Testament, the flood was global and was large enough to cover the entire surface of the earth, including the high mountains (Genesis 7, 11-20).

5 “Ayeten lil alemin” is only mentioned twice in the Qur’an. The first one is about Mary and Jesus’s miraculous birth from her (Anbiya 21:91), and the second is this one about the Great Flood. The phrase ayeten lil alemin is usually translated as “sign for all people”; but all people can only be a subset of what alemin really means. A similar phrase, rahmatan lil-alemin, is used for Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, in the Qur’an (Anbiya 21:107). Hamdi Yazir interprets this phrase as “mercy for all existence.” Ali Unal interprets the same phrase as “unequalled mercy for all the worlds.” So, it is fair in the context of the Great Flood to scrutinize the meaning of “sign for all people/worlds.”

6 It is curious that both in the Old Testament and in the Qur’an, water of the sky is distinctly mentioned aside the water of the earth. In the Old Testament, we are first told about the creation of the water of the sky (Genesis 1:6-8). When the time of the flood comes, the windows of the sky open (Genesis 7:11), and the flood is realized by the cooperation of the water of the skies and earth.

7 Two independent references to this end are a verse from the Qur’an and a hadith, given here respectively: “His (God’s) throne on water” Hud (11:7), “heaven is a sea whose waves have calmed” (Tirmidhi, Tafsir al-Surah 57/1; Musnad, 2/370). In both of these instances, the implicit or explicit use of the concept of water cannot be the water we drink.

8 Yazir, H., Exegesis of the chapter Hud, Hak Dini Kur’an Dili, Vol. 4.

As sleepers floated in their deepest slumbers

In purple and pink, successive dawns were swelling

While in waters swans were elegantly gliding

We felt the shivering breaths of a new spring.

A cerulean serenity had enveloped our dreams

And the sky winked with hope from a distance

In a moment, we were left without defenses

At the point where providence meets resolve

God made our dreams bloom.

The overflowing fountain has come to life again

Breezes high and low promising a bright future

Everywhere embraced by a blessed joy

And the happiest days of life I longed for

Were being lived in the deepest sense, once again.

A pristine spring, with its fresh verdant hues

Like the patterns and colors of the past

The people found the touchstone they had lost

Making up for the great loss they sought

Purple rosebuds on heavenly hills.

With the breeze blowing, now grasses atone

In the lands, once struck lifeless by autumn, are new roses

As if the Trumpet has blown, the dead are resurrected

Along with them in this azure dream

Grieving hearts attain reunion. 

In the light of the explanations above, modesty can be divided into two categories: an innate or instinctive feeling of shame, which prevent people from engaging in what is considered shameful and indecent, and modesty originating in belief, which constitutes an important, deep dimension of Islam.

Combining the instinctive feeling of shame with modesty based on Islam forms the greatest safeguard against shameful or indecent acts. Alone, each one may be diminished or utterly lost. If this innate feeling of shame is not combined with awareness coming from belief and expressed in verses like: Does he not know that God sees (all things)? (96:14) and consciousness of God’s constant oversight: God is ever watching over you (4:1), it cannot last long, for its endurance depends on belief. This essential relation between modesty and belief was expressed by God’s Messenger, who told a Companion after hearing his advice on modesty to another man: “Leave him, for modesty comes from belief.” He also said: “Belief has seventy or so divisions. Modesty is a division of belief.”

We may conclude from these Prophetic sayings that like other seeds of innate virtues, one’s natural feeling of shame develops to the extent it is strengthened with the forces and means that produce knowledge of God. It then becomes a dimension of one’s spiritual life, an obstacle against the carnal self’s excessive desires. If this feeling is not reinforced and developed with belief and knowledge of God or strengthened with consciousness of God’s constant oversight, and left to dissipate in sensual or carnal pleasure, one will witness in an individual or a community those indecencies and perversions that make anyone truly human ashamed of being human. The glory of mankind and the perfect example of modesty, upon him be peace and blessings, said: “If you have no modesty, do whatever you wish.”

The words haya (modesty or feeling of shame) and hayat (life) come from the same root. This signifies that modesty is a sign of a lively heart, and that a heart’s liveliness depends on its owner’s belief and knowledge of God. If a heart is not fed continuously with belief and knowledge of God, it is almost impossible for it to remain lively and give rise to modesty.

According to Junayd al-Baghdadi, haya means awareness of God’s bestowed material and immaterial bounties, and consciousness of personal defects and faults. Dhu al-Nun al-Misri holds that haya means that one constantly feels shame in his or her heart on account of personal sins and offenses, and is therefore careful about his or her actions. Another spiritual master defines haya as never forgetting how God treats one and ordering one’s life according to the fact that God sees all that is done and thought.

It is recorded in al-Qushayri’s Al-Risala that God declares: “O son of Adam! So long as you maintain your modesty and feeling of shame before Me, I make people forget your defects.” The Lord of Might and Dignity also said to Jesus, upon him be peace: “O Jesus, first advise your own selfhood. If it accepts your advice, then you may advise others, or else you must feel ashamed of yourself before Me.”

Some have mentioned different categories of modesty or shame. For example, the shame or modesty felt by:

– Adam, who felt guilty until he was forgiven.

– Angels for their heartfelt incapacity to give due worship to God, as expressed in their saying: “Glory be to You! We are unable to worship You as Your worship requires,” although they glorify Him day and night without stopping.

– Gnostics or those distinguished with knowledge of God in the face of His Majesty, despite their profound knowledge of Him, which they express as: “Glory be to You! We are unable to know You as Your knowledge requires.”

– The spiritually advanced when in awe of God, although they never give in to their carnal desires and ambitions.

– Those distinguished with utmost conviction of God because of their supposed distance from Him, although they always feel His infinite nearness despite the infinite distance of humanity from God Almighty.

– Lovers of God who feel disloyalty arising from their anxiety over not being able to love God as His love requires.

– Those who feel a lack of sufficient sincerity and do not know for what they must pray to God.

– Those exalted ones who are conscious of the fact that they, as human beings, have been honored with the fairest creation, because of the base acts of which they accuse themselves and which, according to them, are irreconcilable with being part of the fairest creation.

The first degree of modesty is to see oneself with the sight of God. That is, the person practices self-control or self-supervision according to God’s standards. This practice engenders a feeling of shame or modesty that produces extreme caution in thoughts and acts. Such a degree of modesty is found in people considered lively on account of their feelings and thoughts.

The second degree is proportional to one’s awareness of nearness to God, and the feeling of always being in His Presence. This can be experienced by those who are always conscious of the meaning of: He is with you wherever you may be (57:4), about which the Prophet, upon him be peace and blessings, said:

“Be as modest before God Almighty, as the necessity of being modest before Him requires. Let him who is blessed with this degree of modesty always control his mind and its contents, as well as his stomach and its contents. Let him always remember death and decay after it. One who desires the afterlife will renounce the adornments of the world. One who is able to do that can feel as much modesty before God as the necessity of being modest before Him requires.”

One can reach the third degree by deeply feeling the absolute Divine disposal of all things, by living a life of profound spirituality in pursuit of the final destination: And in your Lord is the final goal (53:42). The effort to reach this final goal continues throughout a whole life dedicated to following the path to Him.

One’s degree of modesty determines one’s true humanness. If a traveler cannot order his or her life and discipline his or her acts according to the demands of the eternal life and to live in utmost humility and modesty, then his or her existence is a personal shame and a burden to others, as stated in the following couplet:

By God, there is good neither in life
Nor in the world when modesty disappears.

Modesty is a Divine quality and mystery. If people knew to whom it essentially relates, they would act more carefully and sensitively. To illuminate this point, it is related that

God Almighty asks an old man on the Plain of Resurrection to account for his acts in the world: “Why did you commit such and such sins?” The old man denies that he had done so. So, the Most Compassionate of the Compassionate commands the angels: “Take him to Paradise.” The angels want to know why the Almighty has commanded so, although He knows that the old man committed those sins. The Almighty answers: “I know, but I looked at his white beard as one belonging to the Community of Muhammad and felt ashamed to tell him that I knew he was lying.”

As recorded in Kanz al-’Ummal, when the Archangel Gabriel told this to God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, the Messenger’s eyes filled with tears and he said regretfully:

“God Almighty feels ashamed to punish those of my Community whose beards have turned white, but those of my Community with white beards do not feel ashamed to commit sins.”

To sum up:

Hayiy (All-Modest) is one of the Divine Names,
So strive and acquire modesty.

In this article we will review these three concepts and the relations among them by giving examples from the realms of both physical and metaphysical concepts.

Even though there is no universally accepted definition of analogy, or metaphor, or literal similarity, the purpose of their use is unanimously defined as “throwing light on an unfamiliar concept or situation using a familiar one.” The past few decades have witnessed several attempts of redefining these terms or at least extending a definition that is somewhat agreed-upon to an all-encompassing one. In so doing, researchers tended to employ mathematical structures that are by no means simple. What seems to differ from one approach to another is the method used in the process of establishing a correspondence between the familiar and the unfamiliar. Our purpose is not to give a full account of these approaches here, as there are so many of them, but rather to adapt one that is more convenient for conveying our examples.

Analogy: The word analogy is derived from the Greek word analogia. Originally, this was a mathematical (actually a musical) term before becoming a grammatical and linguistic one, meaning “proportion” (Szabo 1978, 23). An example of Aristotelian analogy is “spine is to fish as bone is to animal.” This simple analogy is generally formulated as A:B = C:D. We say, in this case, A and C are analogous. The sense in which A and C are analogous could be a property they have in common as well as the similarity between their relations to B and D, respectively. In the spine and bone example above we observe both. In the analogy “feet are to animal as wheels are to automobile,” however, feet and tires have virtually nothing in common, but they are analogous with respect to their functions within the bodies that they are part of, i.e., both are used as a means of transportation. Therefore, common relations are essential to analogy, but common objects are not. (Gentner-Markman 1997, 46).

One of the recent approaches to analogy which is widely used is the structure-mapping theory (SMT) (Dedre Gentner, 1983). It presumes a mapping between the familiar (domain or base) and the unfamiliar (target). The domain and the target consist of objects and relations among objects. SMT establishes a one-to-one correspondence between the objects of the domain and the target in a way that preserves the relations between objects (Those who are familiar with the category theory in mathematics will notice the resemblance of this mapping to a “covariant functor” between two “categories”). This is a “structural alignment” between the domain and the target (Gentner-Markman 1997, 47). In the “feet and wheels” example the mapping occurs between a body and an automobile. It maps feet to wheels and the relation TRANSPORT (feet, body) to the relation TRANSPORT (wheels, automobile). One can find more matching elements between a body and an automobile. For instance, we can match the heart of the body to the engine of the vehicle and observe that the relations RUN (heart, body) and RUN (engine, automobile) are preserved.

One might ask where do the arms get mapped? The answer is “nowhere.” We do not expect this mapping to match every object in the domain to an object in the target. The “power of the analogy” is not in the number of objects that are matched or the common attributes that the objects share. It is rather the degree of matching among relations that makes an analogy more powerful (Gentner 1982, 110).

Having introduced the concept of analogy by using some simple physical examples let’s now consider a not-so simple metaphysical situation.

In the 1920’s two mathematicians proved a very interesting but at the same time very puzzling theorem, known as the Banach-Tarski Paradox. In plain English, the theorem states that it is possible to divide a solid ball into a few pieces and reassemble those pieces together to make two balls, each of which has the same size as the original ball that was divided. A more striking consequence of their theorem is (you may want to sit down before you read this) a solid ball the size of a small pea can be cut into a number of pieces and reassembled into a new ball the size of the sun! Strange as it may sound, it is a valid mathematical argument, not a myth. (We have to note that it is not something one can do at home using a knife and a cutting board, because some of the pieces have no volume!) The analogy that we would like to establish under SMT is to map that solid ball of the theorem to a small amount of water which could quench the thirst of an army of about 30,000 in Tabuk in year 631. This was a miracle given to Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. A similar miracle of Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him, is described in the Bible, Matthew 14:21 (Volker Runde, in the Sky 2 (2000), 13–15).

Metaphor: The essence of metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another. (Lakoff & Johnson 1980, 104) Simple examples are “What a sweet baby!” “Your car is a lemon, let’s take mine.” Obviously babies are not candies, nor are vehicles some sort of fruit. We use this sort of “identification” in order to communicate our ideas/feelings in a more striking way. Here are more examples of metaphors: “he is the apple of my eye,” “it’s raining cats and dogs,” “he has a golden heart,” “she cried rivers” etc. As these examples show, the distinguishing characteristic of metaphors is substitution, for example, rivers taking the place of tears in the last example. And this substitution takes place between different domains. If we say “a nightingale is a bird,” that’s not a metaphor; it’s a literal categorization, as both nightingale and bird signify the same domain (Gentner 2005, 200).

As long as the correspondence is not purely attributional, but some relations are also preserved we can also talk about structural alignment for metaphors (Gentner 88, 49). From this perspective, many metaphors are in fact analogies, but it’s the form of the language that helps us differentiate them. For example, “the engine is the heart of an automobile” is a metaphor, but it uses the same structural alignment of the analogical comparison that we mentioned above.

Nonetheless, not every metaphor is of this sort. Consider, for example, the verse (48:10) “God’s hand is over their hands” from the Qur’an; this was revealed in connection to some 1,400 believers’ pledging allegiance to Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, under a tree in Hudaybiyah in year 628 by giving their hands to him. Whatever “God’s hand” in this verse refers to, whether it is to His power, His victory, His protection and blessings for the believers, or His acceptance of their pledge, it is far from being a physical hand. Therefore, we can not imagine a relation between dissimilar objects (Gentner 1982, 109; Gentner 2001, 204) that is mapped to the relation (Hand, God) under a structural alignment using SMT.

Literal similarity: If there is a considerable number of common attributes that are shared by the objects of the domain and the target then the comparison is more likely to be a literal similarity (Gentner 1982, 110). For example the comparison in the following verse of the Qur’an is a literal similarity: “Indeed, the example of Jesus to God is like that of Adam. He created him from dust; then He said to him, “Be,” and he was” (3:59). In this example there are a great number of attributes that Jesus and Adam (peace be upon them) share but only one of them is the subject of the comparison here, which is that both Jesus and Adam had no father. If Jesus also had no mother this would be an “identity,” not a similarity (Gentner 1982, 110).

The statement “Jesus is like Adam” makes much more sense than “Jesus is Adam,” even if we make it clear in what sense we use this identification. Typically metaphors use the word “is” and literal similarity comparisons (similes) use either of the words “like” or “as.” Mathematically speaking, if metaphors are equalities, then similes are approximations (Casnig).

Even though metaphors are substitutions, they are not necessarily “two-way” identifications. In other words, most of the times they are asymmetric; i.e., there is a sense of direction in the “identification.” For example, we never substitute a car in the place of a lemon and say “this lemon is a car.” This is because the first and foremost requirement of any comparison is that it be informative. What information do we obtain from the statement “rose is love” or “iron is fist”? In that respect many metaphors are irreversible, like similes: “a butcher like a surgeon” is quite different than “a surgeon like a butcher.” One is a compliment but the other is not! (Gentner 2001, 224). Perhaps irreversibility can also be taken as a distinguishing character of (at least attributional) metaphors.

Mathematical and metaphysical examples: Although there is no consensus on how mathematical ideas come about, it is certain that they are introduced into our world of knowledge by symbolism. Whether we associate a symbol to something physical, such as the symbol 70 to the weight of an object or the letter g to gravitational force, or to an abstract mathematical concept, such as the letter i to √–1, we are substituting one thing to mean another thing. We even associate symbols to concepts we cannot even describe, such as the concept of infinity and the symbol ∝ that is used to represent what it signifies in mathematics. From this perspective, mathematical symbols can be viewed as metaphors (Pimm, David 1981).

On the other hand mathematical formulas preserve the relations among the objects or concepts that they represent. In that respect, it is possible to see them as analogies as well. Therefore, they can be subjects of structural alignment. In the next example we will use SMT to form an analogical comparison between infinity and human life in order to better understand a Qur’anic verse.

In verse (5:32) of the Qur’an reads: “…he who kills a soul unless it be (punishment) for murder or for causing disorder and corruption on the earth will be as if he had killed all humankind; and he who saves a life will be as if he had saved the lives of all humankind…”

In a sense this verse means “one equals many.” How can that be? How can one be equal to a million? Or a billion? Those who know something about mathematics with infinities will remember that it is a quite different thing from mathematics with ordinary numbers. For example, if we add two infinities we still get infinity, i.e., ∝+∝=.∝=∝, something that never happens with any finite number, except for 0 (0+0=2.0=0). Likewise, if we add any number of infinities together we still get infinity: ∝+∝+∝+…∝=∝.Therefore, for any positive number m if we write m.∝=∝ it would be a perfectly acceptable mathematical statement.

Now, everyone will agree that there is no value one can associate to human life. Therefore, it’s fair to say that the value of human life is infinite. Let’s map “∝” to “saving the life of one person” under a structural alignment and let counting people in the target correspond to adding infinities in the domain. Now, if m represents the total number of lives on earth then what element should we associate to saving them altogether? The answer is m infinities added together, in other words m.∝ But seeing that m.∝ is equal to ∝ we can say that saving the lives of all people on earth is no different than saving the life of one individual! That’s how one can equal many. Now, if we map “killing an innocent person” to “–∝” then we clearly see that the mathematical statement m.(-∝)=-∝translates into “killing all innocent people on earth is as grave a sin as killing one.”

Note that this “one equals many” situation is not a violation of the requirement that structure mapping be one-to-one (Gentner-Markman 1997, 47). It’s a relation that occurs between the objects of the domain and the objects of the target and that relation is preserved under a one-to-one structure mapping.

Another relation between infinities is that “∝-∝” is indeterminate. In particular “∝-∝” is not necessarily 0. Using the analogy we just constructed we can translate this as “killing one innocent person and saving the life of another does not balance out.” Then, “∝-∝” is indeterminate” translates as “we cannot know if God will forgive that person for saving a life or punish him/her for taking one; it depends on which ∝ is greater!” Indeed, those who have taken calculus will remember that “∝-∝” sometimes turns out to be a positive number and sometimes a negative number; as well as 0 or ∝ or -∝

One could ask, what about m.0=0? Isn’t this also true? Yes, indeed “the sum of m zeros is equal to zero” is another mathematically accurate statement. Then, what meaning could this equation be given? Perhaps this would be the “murderer’s” version of the Qur’anic principle that we mentioned above: “When the life of an individual has “no value” in your heart, killing one person or a million people should be equally disheartening (!)”

Another mathematical tool that would be helpful in interpreting the above-mentioned principle is a technique that is used in mathematical proofs. When proving a fact about a set of elements in mathematics one proves it for an arbitrarily chosen member of the set and it is automatically generalized to the rest of the elements in the set. For example, in order to prove the statement “the square root of every prime number is irrational” we choose a prime number, say p, arbitrarily and prove the statement for it. Once we do that it is as if we proved that √2 is irrational, √3 is irrational, √5 is irrational etc. It covers all the numbers in the form √p, where p is a prime number. In the same way, when one kills an innocent person the message that it is acceptable to kill “any” innocent person is given, as the choice of person has been made arbitrarily. Therefore, this can be likened to killing all of mankind because being able to kill one person is simply generalized to all people who could be in that person’s shoes.

Summary: In this article we have given examples of analogy, metaphor, and literal similarity and have tried to indicate some distinguishing characters that set them apart. We included some uncommon metaphysical phenomena which have been placed in analogical correspondence with mathematical quantities with the intention of showing that mathematics can be used to shed light on purely religious concepts as well.

Yusuf Ziya Gurtas is an assistant professor of mathematics in Queensborough Community College, CUNY.

References

• Casnig, John D. 1997–2009. A Language of Metaphors. Knowgramming.com. Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
• Gentner, Dedre. 1982. “Are scientific analogies metaphors?” in David S. Miall (Ed.), Metaphor, Problems and Perspectives, Brighton, England: Harvester Press, pp. 106–132.
• –. 1983. “Structure-Mapping: A Theoretical Framework for Analogy.” Cognitive Science, 7, pp. 155–170.
• –. 1988. “Metaphor as Structure Mapping: The Relational Shift.” Child Development, 59, 47–59.
• Gentner, Dedre & Markman, Arthur D. 1997. “Structure Mapping in Analogy and Similarity.” American Psychologist, 52, 45–56.
• Gentner, Dedre, Bowdle, B., Wolff, P., & Boronat, C. 2001. “Metaphor is like analogy” in D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. Kokinov (Eds.), The Analogical Mind: Perspectives from Cognitive Science, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 199–253.
• Gentner, Dedre & Bowdle, Brian F. 2005. “The Career of Metaphor.” Psychological Review, 112, pp. 193–216.
• Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Pimm, David. 1981. “Metaphor and Analogy in Mathematics.” For the Learning of Mathematics, 1, 47–50.
• Runde, Volker. 2000. “The Banach-Tarski Paradox or What Mathematics and Miracles Have in Common.” in the Sky, 2, 13–15.
• Szabo, A. 1978. The Beginnings of Greek Mathematics. Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel.

The example given above-not stealing customers’ money versus not being a rich person-is just one possible case among others which human beings feel tension because of conflicting cognitions. Most people have personal beliefs, principles, and values shaping their lives fundamentally. Psychologists use the concept of cognition to imply all of these factors that guide our choices. Cognitions regulate our lives at any moment regardless of our consciousness of them. For instance, some people could venture everything to have more money because they have a cognition whispering “money, money, money,” or others can sacrifice everything for the sake of beliefs because of their cognition, “I believe therefore I am.” Even though human beings feel good when these cognitions drive us to success, good decisions, and a satisfying life, they turn out to be a source of frustration when a certain cognition conflicts with another one. In such cases, what we usually do is to find a way to resolve the conflict because we do not like to live with this tension. How then can we cope with this conflict?

The most common attitude under such circumstances is “self-justification.” If we turn to our example, Peter chose one of the two alternatives: continue to steal his customers’ money in order to become a rich person. Now he must find a good reason to justify himself and reduce his inner conflict:

“Not stealing is not the only way of being an honest person. You cannot be a bad guy just because of one unique behavior in your life, given that other people are also committing such sins, even worse sometimes.”

“My customers are the richest people in the State; it is not greed if I want them to share some of their money. Actually, they do not deserve it at all.”

“I did that to ensure the future happiness of my family; I know that making your family happy is more important than being honest.”

There can be many other reasons or justifications for such a behavior. The truth is that, Peter is trying to convince himself about his behavior. Although people’s attempts to convince themselves are not necessarily rational, they try to rationalize their behaviors by changing their cognitions or adding new ones.

All of the above are in the simple processes of Leon Festinger’s (1957) theory of cognitive dissonance. He contends that when an individual has two or more cognitions (beliefs, opinions, ideas etc.) which are inconsistent with each other, then tension emerges and people attempt to reduce this tension. How can the tension be reduced? The answer is through changing one or both cognitions or by adding new cognitions to alleviate discrepancies between cognitions. Our behaviors in such situations will determine the way we behave the next time we encounter a similar situation. Our ultimate behavior will depend on the strength of one’s cognitions (Aronson, 2004). If being a rich person is more important than not being greedy, a person is more likely to choose to steal money.

It is critical that the choice does not have to be right or rational. Let’s remember Peter’s excuses for stealing. He tended to believe that stealing was not as bad as he thought before because he found some justifications. Now he seems to feel better, but what about the next step? Most probably, he will continue to steal. As one can easily see, dissonance reduction is mostly an irrational behavior. Apparently, these irrational behaviors help people to defend their “self” or “ego.” Through the help of these irrational beliefs, people continue to define themselves as if they are good, smart, decent, or generous people. The underlying motive is the need for self-justification.

Cognitive dissonance from the perspective of religion

There are many musts and must-nots in a believer’s mind. One common practice of dissonance reduction appears at a point where one must choose between committing a sin or making a righteous decision. While preaching or reading holy books nurtures spiritual “cognitions” in a religious mind, obeying concupiscence and chasing essentially worldly goals will weaken this. After every sin that a believer committed, the battle of the cognitions starts between “I am a religious guy” and “I committed a sin, therefore I am not a decent person.” Since these cognitions cannot live peacefully together in a religious mind, one of the conflicting cognitions will grow out of this battle.

This process meshes with a religious idea that “Within each sin is a path leading to unbelief” (Nursi, The Second Gleam). If a person insists on performing a sinful act, he starts to disdain his sin. After a while, as he keeps behaving in the same manner, he becomes addicted to the sin and tends to see it as a normal act. Instead of acknowledging that the sins are witnessed by the angels and seen by God, an unrighteous man may like the idea that they may not exist at all, which is again comforting. With that idea, the cognition of “I am a religious person” is surpassed by a new cognition, “Maybe the religion that I accepted has some flaws” or “is questionable” which were added to relieve the pain arising from the cognition “I am not a good person.” From this point of view, people’s preferences about their beliefs are not independent of their behaviors which foster or challenge their religious cognitions.

One’s tendency to justify himself is usual but may not be what ought-to-be from the moral point of view. As people justify themselves, they will ignore whatever is wrong with their behaviors or cognitions, which will make them insensitive. Going beyond psychology’s objective description of human beings as rationalizing or justifying beings, religious sources suggest rejecting self-justification in most of cases. The Qur’an quotes the Prophet Joseph: “Yet I do not claim my self free of error, for assuredly the human carnal soul always commands evil, except that my Lord has mercy. Surely my Lord is All-Forgiving, All-Compassionate” (Yusuf 12:53). This means, self-awareness about the conflicting cognitions is critical for human beings. When the person has inconsistent cognitions, choosing the option that does not solely serve to justify himself will prevent the person from going toward unbelief. Christianity also pointed to the importance of facing up to our sins: “I acknowledged my sin to You, and in my iniquity I have not hidden. I said, ‘I will confess my transgressions to the Lord,’ and You forgave the iniquity of my sin” (Psalms 32:5).

Between the good and bad

Human cognitions determine their choices and actions, which in turn nurture, shape or weaken our cognitions. Repeating a sin a second time is easier than the first time, and we feel less dissonance because cognitions creating dissonance are replaced by those that bring inner comfort. People who exhibit extremely deviant and sociopathic behaviors should be reconsidered from this point of view. Extremely deviant behaviors should be considered a series of earlier choices which gradually led to the ultimate misconduct rather than the consequence of a unique decision made at a specific time.

Another possible implication of the theory of cognitive dissonance is the difficulty with judging absolute good or bad. Given the fact that cognitions may become weaker or stronger, personal views on the appropriateness of behaviors are subject to change. Human cognitions are potential mechanisms that lead one to behave in a certain way. Therefore, deviant behaviors might have a long history fed by the cognitions which turn out to be one’s rationale for inappropriate behaviors. As a result, cognitive dissonance uncovers the gray area between the continuum of good and bad through which human beings swing all the time.

Conclusion

Cognitive dissonance theory provides convincing explanations about how human beings make their decisions and behave in a moral or immoral manner. Also, it brings a resourceful perspective to illuminate spiritual experiences. It successfully explains how people swing on the path from good to bad and vice versa instead of considering them as dwelling on two discrete entities. Awareness of the above-mentioned processes is critical to increase self-awareness.

One last comment should be made about the role of conscience in cognitive dissonance. Although cognitive dissonance theory successfully explains many cognitive processes, a mental faculty that is responsible for recognizing the discrepancy in our cognitions and regulating the balance between them is conscience. However, psychology’s account of conscience is rather limited and inconclusive. Psychology offers evidence of the way human beings behave in dissonant situations. Religious resources, however, provide prescriptive guidelines to remain on the right track. As in the case of this unique theory, understanding the theories of psychology as well as making sense of them in the light of religious texts provides individuals with a heightened self-awareness.

References

• Aronson, E. 2004. The Social Animal, 9th edition, Worth Publishers: New York, NY
• Festinger, L. 1957. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.

ENIAC had cost around $500.000 and was capable of 5000 simple operations per second. Today, basic personal computers (PC) cost around $500 with enough processing power to perform millions of operations per second. An average PC is enough in terms of computing power for everyday use like word processing, checking emails, and computer games. However, some areas in scientific research require computers at the frontline of current processing capacity, called Super Computers. Twice a year, the TOP500 project, which started in 1993, ranks and publishes details of the 500 most powerful super computers in the world. The IBM Roadrunner, located at Los Alamos National Laboratory, was announced as the fastest supercomputer in the world as of May 2008.

In computing, “flop” (Floating Point Operations Per Second) is a measure of a computer’s performance which is similar to calculations per second. The IBM Roadrunner had cost $133 million and had a peak performance of 1.7 petaflops, which is around 1.7×1015 operations per second. The Roadrunner was delivered on 21 tractor-trailer trucks to its current location. Supercomputers are an essential component of research in areas like computational biology, fluid dynamics, structural mechanics and cancer research, which requires high computing power.

While computers get faster every year, their computing power is way behind when compared to a human brain. They consume hundreds of times more energy than a brain. It is estimated that a computer will be able to simulate a human brain in seven years, yet we are decades away from expecting a computer that can think like a human and make decisions. The brain is one of the most miraculous parts of the human body, full of mysteries. It works more efficiently than any machine developed in the last 50 years of the computer history.

However, the human brain is not the only body part which has an incredible computing power. In 1994, Leonard M. Adleman, a professor at the University of Southern California, introduced the idea of using DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid) to solve computational problems [3]. This idea then led to a new field of science, called DNA Computing, which combines two disciplines, biology and computer science, to build the fastest and smallest computers ever. DNA is known as the blueprint of life, with unique properties such as self-assembly, molecular recognition, minute size and high information density.

Computationally challenging problems have known solutions, but enormous amounts of resources (time and/or cost) are required to find the optimum solution. Some problems, such as optimization, can be solved by generating many possible solutions, and then selecting the optimum one. Standard computing methods can generate or test a possible solution one at a time. On the other hand, parallel computing methods can carry out this process simultaneously for thousands of possible solutions.

Similarly, enzymes can work in parallel for replicating and repairing DNA strands. They can even work on the next strand before the first one is replicated. An enzyme can replicate a DNA strand 500 times in a second, which is equal to 0.001 MIPS (million instructions per second). The computations in DNA can reach to 1014 MIPS, while a modern computer runs at an average of 1000 MIPS. DNA computing is not only faster in processing, but also much more efficient in energy consumption. The energy consumption of a DNA operation (on one strand) is about 1010 times less than the energy consumption of an operation on modern computers.

The Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP) is one of the most studied problems in computational mathematics. Here is an example of the problem: a traveling salesman needs to visit 20 cities once, with predefined starting and ending locations, and certain rules. The complexity of the TSP problems increases exponentially with the number of cities, so problems with only hundreds of cities will take thousands of years to solve by modern computers. If there are 18 factorial possible paths in this problem, it will take 2 whole years for a computer with 100 MIPS of processing power to generate the possible paths and find the correct answer. However, all possible paths can be generated in a very short time by using DNA computing. A simplified version of the Traveling Salesman problem presented by Adleman involves the following scenario:

A salesman wants to visit the cities (Figure 3) Monroe, Gainesville, and Conyers, starting from Athens, and arriving at Atlanta last. Each city should be visited only once. The cities are not fully connected. While some cities are connected to another in one direction, others are connected in both directions. Our objective is to find the shortest route to visit all cities once. The solution for this problem is a travel from Athens -> Gainesville -> Monroe -> Conyers -> Atlanta.

When we convert the problem to a molecular language, each city is coded as a single-stranded DNA molecule with 8 nucleotides. We can think of nucleotides as bytes in computer programming, which will take the value 0 or 1. Nucleotides exist as four bases: adenine (A), thymine (T), guanine (G) and cytosine (C). All cities are coded with eight nucleotides as follows:

City Code

Athens ATGC CATG

Gainesville TCAG GTCA

Monroe GACT TGAC

Conyers CGTA ACGT

Atlanta AGCT TAGC

Connections between two cities are coded with the last 4 nucleotides of the departure city and the first 4 nucleotides of the arrival city. For example, the connection between Athens (ATGCCATG) and Monroe (GACTTGAC) is coded as CATGGACT. The complementary codes for connections (the Watson-Crick complements), where every C is replaced by a G, every G by a C, every A by a T, and every T by an A, and connection codes are given below:

Connection Code Complementary Code

Athens – Gainesville CATG TCAG GTAC AGTC

Athens – Monroe CATG GACT GTAC CTGA

Gainesville – Atlanta GTCA AGCT CAGT TCGA

Gainesville – Monroe GTCA GACT CAGT CTGA

Monroe – Conyers TGAC CGTA ACTG GCAT

Conyers – Atlanta ACGT AGCT TGCA TCGA

Conyers – Monroe ACGT GACT TGCA CTGA

The mixture for performing reactions will include DNA strands and their complements for 5 cities and 7 connections between cities in our example. If an Athens molecule (ATGC CATG) encounters the complement strand of an Athens-Monroe (GTAC CTGA) connection in the mixture, a hydrogen bond will be formed between strands (Figure 4). Other strands will continue forming bonds for valid connections between cities, building a complete travel path with the help of DNA ligase. There needs to be enough copies of each DNA strand to generate all possible travel paths.

ATGC – CATG

| | | |

GTAC – CTGA

Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) will be used to make multiple duplicates of DNA strands containing Athens (start) and Atlanta (end) cities. The result of PCR will be the amplification of correct travel from Athens to Atlanta, which makes it easy to separate. PCR is a method by which a few strands of DNA can be copied into millions in a very short amount of time. This also makes PCR a very important method to increase small amounts of DNA found in blood or hair samples, which could be enough to carry out analysis and reveal a person’s identity in forensic science.

Electrophoresis follows the PCR process to sort the resulting paths according to their sizes. Since every city is coded with 8 nucleotides, the correct path should include exactly 40 nucleotides representing a full path for 5 cities. The gel electrophoresis process uses an electric field to separate DNA strands by size as they travel through a gel matrix. The speed of DNA molecules differs by their size, which results in the sorting of the molecules by size. After this step, DNA strands starting with the code of Athens, ending with the code of Atlanta and with a size of 40 nucleotides are separated from the mixture.

The last step will be reading the code and removing the DNA strands that didn’t contain all the cities. Adleman used a common method known as affinity purification for the separation process. Finally, the mixture has the DNA strands with the correct travel path, starting from Athens and arriving to Atlanta, and traveling through every city once. All the laboratory work looks complex for this simple problem, but as a new concept for computing, it is revolutionary. In its ability to perform parallel computations, DNA computing shows great promise over traditional computing approaches.

Data density is another unique advantage of DNA. Billions of DNA strands can be stored in a regular laboratory tube. A DNA strand is composed of bases A, T, C and G spaced evenly, 0.35 nanometers apart from each other. The data density of DNA is around 106 GB (gigabytes) per square inch, which is 100,000 times larger than the data density of today’s storage technologies (7 GB per square inches). Moreover, DNA is a durable and strong molecule; the information stored within it can be kept for thousands of years in the right conditions. In 2008, 80% of the woolly mammoth genome, several thousand years old, has been identified from tufts of frozen woolly mammoth hair [4].

DNA is also created with remarkable mechanisms such as built-in error correction. The double stranded nature of DNA provides a double check on pairing. Error repairing enzymes are always ready to search for anomalies during the DNA replication process. It results ina ratio of one error per billion replications. DNA is located and protected at the center of each cell with a perfect balance. The miraculous architecture of DNA has waited for thousands of years to be understood by humans and be used for the benefit of the world. Further studies on DNA might open new opportunities to help researchers in solving technologically challenging problems.

Acknowledgment: This article was produced at MERGEOUS [5], an online article and project development service for authors and publishers dedicated to the advancement of technologies in the merging realms of science and religion.

Halil I. Demir is a postdoctoral scholar in the area of Informatics, and lives in Iowa.

References

[1] ENIAC, Image Credit: Wikimedia, http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/Eniac.jpg

[2] IBM Roadrunner, Image Credit: Wikimedia,

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c7/Roadrunner_supercomputer_HiRes.jpg

[3] Leonard M. Adleman (1994-11-11). “Molecular Computation of Solutions to Combinatorial Problems.” Science, 266 (11): 1021–1024.

[4] Miller, W (et al). 2008. “Sequencing the nuclear genome of the extinct woolly mammoth”, November, Nature.

[5] Mergeous, http://www.mergeous.com

She might as well save her breath. After carrying water in pails and plastic bins from the first to the fourth floor of the building where we live, I know better than to waste a drop of it.

Moms love to warn though, so there she goes again: “We have so little left. Use it sparingly. Make it last until evening.”

In the evening my sister and I will start our summer ritual-water carrying-like the rest of our neighbors who don’t live on the first floor. The town’s water reserve level drops so low in the summer that the water pushes itself up the pipes to the first floor, but no further. On the first floor the water flows from the taps while in the higher floors it carries only growling sounds, like a monster in a bad mood.

So we use it sparingly, only when strictly necessary.

In winter the water runs through the taps of the whole building, not discriminating on the terms of the floors, three times a day for an hour and a half. Every household is busy filling every useable container in their possession during that time.

In the summer our survival grimly depends on the mercy of our first floor neighbors. Twelve families, three for each floor, carry their water up four flights of stairs, utilizing pails, bins, bottles, even cauldrons for this vital cause. Children are the most diligent carriers.

The clock on the wall reminds me that I need to get ready for the water’s evening course. The water won’t come for fifteen more minutes, but I must get in line at my first floor neighbor’s door to be ready.

I grab a pail and two bottles in a plastic bag. I run down the worn smooth stairs.

Soon, other neighbors join the march.

I am third in line.

The first is our next door neighbor, Auntie Jazja. She handles the ordeal quite normally. “I have seen worse,” tell her eyes.

Lina comes second. She lives in the fifth floor, above us. Three years older than me, but not much stronger, she holds an aluminum pail with a blackened bottom. Who knows how many times it has been used to heat water on the stove?

Behind me, fourth in line, is my best friend, Dita. She is restlessly switching hands with her glass bottles clinking noisily. She will break them sooner than she fills them with water. The line grows longer each minute.

Everybody talks with those nearby. Lina and Dita are chatterboxes. I am caught in the crossfire of their words.

I worry that our buzz will annoy our gracious first floor neighbor and she will shoo us away.

When the water starts gushing in we fall silent, listening in reverie. It is proper to wait ten to fifteen minutes for the household to fill their share of water, before the first in line is urged to knock.

I am glad Auntie Jazja is to do that today. A senior lady is always hard to turn down.

Soon enough she goes inside, greeting and blessing the benevolence of the neighbor who seems unpleased opening the door to a bunch of thirsty people. As we hear the water fill Aunties Jazja’s glass bottle, we let out a breath of relief.

Meanwhile the chatting resumes. We talk of anything but water.

Lina runs inside with her pail when Auntie Jazja calls her name, letting her know that she is almost done.

Auntie Jazja comes out carrying four one-liter glass bottles, two in each hand. A thin layer of condensation has formed on them. I think that is the picture of perfection. Those drops forming and dripping on the transparent glass refresh my soul.

Lina, shouts my name. It’s my turn. My heart beats in panic for fear that the moment I place my bottle under the tap, the water will stop flowing. Instead, I will hear that horrible whistle which I dread so much.

I enter, greet the lady of the house and head toward the bathroom. Lina is filling her pail, keeping a short hose in it. The water is forming turbulence, increasing in level, making me feel dizzy a bit with impatience.

When she withdraws her pail, I very quickly put my own under the hose, not wasting a drop of water or a second of time. We have to race with time as well, you see. There are people in line waiting.

I fill my container and call my best friend who appears in a second by my side.

I thank my neighbor, although I will return for more water in a few minutes. She knows that a pail and a few bottles of water are not enough for a family of six. I will make two more rounds if the time permits.

As I go up the stairs, I see a trail of water drops. Lina’s pail must be leaking. How silly! By the time she reaches home, half of the water will be gone. I look behind me to see if my pail is leaking, too. I am glad it is not.

At the second floor I feel my arm tighten. Warm numbness creeps up to my shoulders. The pail is heavy; my limbs stretch while my back complains. I put down my burden and I notice a fine red line forming in my palm by the handle of the pail.

I feel hot, and sweat is roller coasting down the bones of my spine. I will drink half a bottle of water to quench my thirst.

I take a deep breath, grab the pail and the bottle and step up the stairs. A frightful thought invades my mind. I had heard from Lina that carrying heavy weight was extremely harmful to young girls. It could badly damage the back, and also be disabling in childbearing. Although nine times out of ten I don’t believe what Lina tells me, this time I worry. Could it be true? My breathing becomes heavier and my muscles tenser. Tears swell around my eyes. I decide not to worry. Why have children anyway? To send them downstairs to carry water until they break their backs?

As I approach the third floor, I come across my little sister hurrying down the steps with one-liter plastic bottles under each arm. She smiles. I remember once when I was her age, I fell on the last steps of the fourth floor. I hurt my knee and my bottles rolled down, mercilessly spilling the water. I couldn’t stop crying, pretending that it was my knee that made me cry so much when it was the waste of water that broke my heart.

I leave the pail and the bottles in front of my door and as I catch my breath, I listen to Lina’s mother scold her daughter for carelessly spilling half of the pail on the stairs. It’s not her fault. The pail is leaking. But I would rather not interfere.

I ring the bell. Mom appears with a worried look. A shade of pity lingers on her face as she takes the full containers inside, and with an air of apology hands me the empty ones. “My poor girl” her eyes lament. I have noticed that the more I go up and down to make Mom happier with the abundance of water she could use, the sadder she gets. That’s when I feel most miserable.

As she closes the door, I overhear her curse the incompetent government, blaming the infrastructure for our misery. I know the government blames the lack of rain. When the rain vindicates itself in fall showers the government will blame it again, this time for the flood. You see how hopeless it is?

I go down the stairs, this time with two plastic pails. I feel so light that I wish I would never reach the first floor, but I do. Lina is again in front of me. The chatting continues as intensely as the flow of water.

Lina produces a photo from her dress pocket. A young man poses in front of greenest garden I have ever seen. The blue of the sky and the whiteness of his teeth contrast attractively, but I can’t take my eyes off the vast lawn behind him.

“This is my cousin, Alban,” Lina says. “You remember? He immigrated to France four years ago. He is doing quite well. He works in the Luxembourg Gardens in Paris,” she says proudly, as if her cousin had become the mayor of the city.

I am busy sorting out something confusing though. Isn’t Luxembourg a country in Europe? Then what business do Luxembourg Gardens have in Paris, the capital of France? I doubt Lina has any idea where France or Luxembourg is, so I keep my peace.

“Do you know they water the grass in this humongous garden with sprinklers that turn on automatically?” she asks.

And before I express my admiration, she goes on about her cousin’s high salary, the car he drives, his clothes and the gifts he sent to them last year.

“I envy him, you know,” she concludes. Her eyes are daydreaming.

“I envy the grass,” I think to myself, but I don’t say it aloud. I would break into tears if I pronounced how worthless I felt, and then I would have the whole line asking what was wrong. What is it like to lie under the sun and be sprinkled with thousands of silvery droplets that replenish every cell of your being? What makes the grass of Luxembourg luckier than me? A surge of envy fills my heart.

Lina counts with delight all the things her cousin has, unaware that she is counting all the things we lack as well. She gets on my nerves. I am saved only when her name is called. She goes in, leaving me with pails full of despair.

I did five rounds of water carrying today. Some neighbors had gone out of town leaving the line, ever so graciously, to us. After dinner I fell asleep listening to the news anchor woman explaining that this year’s drought was the worst ever.

With her drought-warning words echoing in my head, I dived into the world of sleep, and I dreamed. I saw my town was flooded. Angry rivers of water carried furniture, cars, and trees floating in the streets. Among them I saw a body floating, undisturbed. Then I recognized that it was my body. My eyes were closed peacefully. I looked like I was sleeping. In dreams you can do anything, even sleep on a flood’s current. A radiant smile of intact elation lingered on my face. I remember thinking out loud, “I don’t know whether I am dead or not. Yet, no doubt I am happy. So happy that I don’t envy the grass of Luxembourg anymore.”

Mirkena Ozer is pursuing MA in women studies at the University of Georgia, Atlanta. 

The waves were in such a rush, like all the bustling people in the city.

Maybe if you rush you will get more done: that is their theory.

Ours is: how much we comprehend life.

Life is a gift given to you only once. Peacefully, take your time.

Maybe there is a norm.

Life should be rushed at some points and slowed at other times.

I guess it depends on your perspective of things,

Kind of like a movie “On Demand” when you think about it…

Some people like to watch the whole thing through once.

Others fast forward at some sections.

Some speed up at the scary parts, or the kissing scene.

Sometimes they rewind and analyze what the actor was trying to articulate.

It all depends on your perspective.

Life is one thing for sure though: too precious to waste.

If one wants to accomplish anything in life, he or she first must think.

You may think about why you are here, what the things around you represent, how you got here. You may question life. It’s one of the habitual things we should do.

You sit there, watch the waves rolling in, moving the sand at the beach, look over the horizon, and think…

God it is Who has made the sea to be of service to you by making it subservient (to His command), so that the ships may run through it by His command, and that you may seek of His bounty, and that (in return) you may be thankful. He has also made of service to you whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth; all is from Him (a gift of His Grace). Surely in this there are (clear) signs for a people who think deeply.

(Qur’an 45:12–13)

Ceyda Sablak is a high school senior who has yet many dreams to pursue in the life that waits for her…

“What would you do if you were told you had only 72 hours to live?” was the theme we announced in the last year’s essay contest. The winner of this contest is Joseph Salter, who participated from behind bars. Yes, this is true. He is the author of five unpublished novels he has written during his term in jail. Read what this talented author, who is serving jail-time for a period unknown to us, has to say about if he were told he only had three days remaining to live. We will continue to publish other interesting essays submitted for the contest in following issues. Each of them responds to this question – which is somewhat distressing for many – with unique content, revealing unaccomplished dreams, regrets, and thankfulness.

We would like your attention and participation as we announce a new initiative that our magazine is introducing: The Fountain Talks. Organized by The Fountain and other participating organizations, The Fountain Talks is the name for locally organized seminars in which we will discuss any of the essays published in our most recent issue or any of those themes we generally stress in our publication. The first of such events took place on February 20 in Ohio in cooperation with TASCO, which featured Dr. Nuh Aydin, who made a presentation on his book review published in the previous issue. The Fountain Talks will be held very soon in Singapore, Australia, Indonesia, and Malaysia in the form of a series of panels starting from March 29. TCC in New York will host Julie Ann Cunningham who will speak on her “Music of the Spheres” article (issue 76) March 31. Please contact your local representative for The Fountain to learn about the details.